- From: (unknown charset) Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:42:56 +0100
- To: (unknown charset) public-tracking@w3.org
Hi! from the constructive and lively mailing list discussion on ISSUE-111 I understand that we do not have agreement on how to best manage the exceptions. The purpose of today's call is to a) Understand the objectives of the site-specific exceptions b) Understand all the observations and discussions and most importantly c) find a team/ teams of volunteers that would like to create a revised proposal Regards, matthias PS: Some inputs, I picked from the mailing list: DISCUSSION 1: Opinions on the Granularity of site-specific exceptions: - Permitting specific third parties is too fine-grained and users will neither know these third parties nor care - As a consequence, only opt-in to "*" will be used - Users want transparency and need to know what third parties are in use - A browser always 'knows' the third parties (after all, it sends http requests) - Users may want to prevent exceptions for selected third parties that are perceived as bad - Third parties should not be treated as a 'third party of a first party" but rather as independent entities (asking for exeptions on their own) - ... DISCUSSION 2: Informing the server of the current exeption state at the client - A site needs to know whether the third parties in use still work - A site does not know what third parties are actually used at a point in time Status: DNT;2 to signal that there are site-specific exeptions for a site - Transparency: At the end of the day, the browser can control the interaction and the browser can request a 3rd party resource, or not. So 3rd parties better declare that they have implemented DNT to generate some confidence. We are creating an entire new ecosystem here. And all have to adapt to this new ecosystem. The user has to make responsible choices. First parties have to take their responsibilities on what to allow on their site. And third parties have to work to regain some confidence. Hiding doesn't help here. On 3/13/2012 5:53 PM, Matthias Schunter wrote: > > Chair:Matthias > > Goals: > - Start new discussions on open issues for TPE > - Assign actions to revise/write text addressing those issues > > --------------------------- > Administrative > --------------------------- > > 1. Selection of scribe > > 2. Any comments on minutes: > http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-dnt-minutes > <http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-minutes> > > 3. Review of overdue action items: > https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue > <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/> > > --------------------------- > New business > --------------------------- > > 4. ISSUE-111: Signaling status and existence of site-specific exceptions > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/111 > > 5. Responses: Header & URI > - Discuss Tom & Roy's ideas how to combine headers and URIs > > --------------------------- > More business (if time permits) > --------------------------- > > 6. Creation of new actions for TPE > > 7. Announce next meeting & adjourn > > ================ Infrastructure ================= > > Zakim teleconference bridge: > VoIP: sip:zakim@voip.w3.org > Phone +1.617.761.6200 passcode TRACK (87225) > IRC Chat: irc.w3.org <http://irc.w3.org/>, port 6665, #dnt
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2012 10:43:30 UTC